http://tribune.com.pk/story/56578/lhc-upholds-death-for-blasphemy-accused/

http://tribune.com.pk/story/56578/lhc-upholds-death-for-blasphemy-accused/

LHC upholds death for blasphemy accused
Rana Tanveer
The Express Tribune

September 30th, 2010.

courtesy: http://tribune.com.pk/story/56578/lhc-upholds-death-for-blasphemy-accused/

LAHORE: A division bench of the Lahore High Court on Wednesday confirmed the death sentence handed down to a blasphemy convict and ordered that he be hanged till death.

This is the second case of its kind in the country when the death sentence of a blasphemy accused has been confirmed by the LHC since inception of the blasphemy law.

An Additional District and Sessions Judge Lahore on May 27, 2002 had awarded Wajihul Hassan death sentence for allegedly uttering blasphemous remarks against the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and other prophets. He was also accused of hurting religious sentiments of the complainant – Senior Advocate Muhammad Ismail Qureshi.

Allam Iqbal Town Police registered an FIR against Hassan under sections 295-C (use of derogatory remarks in respect of Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), 295-A (malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) and 298-A (use of derogatory remarks in respect of holy personages).

The session judge had awarded him death sentence and Rs0.2 million fine under section 295-C, 10 years’ imprisonment and Rs50,000 fine under section 295-A and two years’ imprisonment and Rs20,000 fine under section 298-A.

According to the complainant – Advocate Muhammad Ismail Qureshi – who had got Ahmadis declared non-Muslims by the Supreme Court, some unknown persons had been wiring him frequent letters carrying blasphemous remarks against the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and other prophets.

In the FIR he alleged that although the letters did not contain names of the senders, he was sure that Wajihul Hassan was behind these letters. He alleged that Wajihul Hassan was a Muslim but later converted to Christianity and was using derogatory remarks against the Holy Prophet (pbuh). The complainant could not produce any of these letters before the police and mentioned in the FIR that he had burnt all the six letters.

During the course of investigation, however, he handed over seven such letters to the authorities attributing them to accused Hassan. He also said that Nawaz Butt and Hassan are names of the same person.

During the trial, the complainant produced 10 prosecution witnesses to buttress his case against the accused. The witnesses said they had seen Hassan uttering blasphemous remarks.

Counsel for Hassan, Advocate Parvaiz Aslam Chaudhry, strongly rejected the prosecution story, saying that on the basis of extra-judicial confession of witnesses before the trial court, an accused could not be awarded death sentence.

He told The Express Tribune that in his statement under section 342 of CrPC his client had denied uttering any blasphemous remarks. He quoted Hassan as saying that he was a Muslim and believed in the last Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and never dared to utter or write any blasphemous remarks.

He said by birth he is a Muslim and never converted to Christianity. He said the complainant deliberately named him as Murshad Masih to strengthen his stance but it was not his name. They intend to file an appeal against the LHC order before the Supreme Court.

Advocate Chaudhry claimed that the motive behind registration of FIR was that complainant Qureshi had a grudge against former Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) chairperson Asma Jahangir.

Hassan and his father Safdar Hussain were employees at the office of Asma, he claimed, adding that Qureshi tried to use Hassan against Asma but over his refusal he implicated him in the case.

Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) chairman told The Express Tribune that the commission was against the capital punishment at first place, adding that blasphemy laws have long been misused in Pakistan.

He said, “Blasphemy laws have always been controversial. People have been using them to penalise their opponents and minorities. HRCP and other organisations have long been demanding that the blasphemy law should be repealed”.

He said that this government was considering abolishing capital punishment but hasn’t implemented it yet.

Asma Jahangir denied having any link with accused Hassan. She said he never had been her employee.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 30th, 2010.


September 30, 2010

Pak trained terrorists to fight India: Musharraf by Indrani Bagchi

Pak trained terrorists to fight India: Musharraf

by Indrani Bagchi

, TNN, Oct 6, 2010, 12.40am IST

courtesy: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Pak-trained-terrorists-to-fight-India-Musharraf/articleshow/6694651.cms

NEW DELHI: It's hardly a candid confession but it still has the power to shock.

Former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf admitted what India and the world have known for a while now -- that the Pakistan government trained terrorists against India and pushed them into Jammu and Kashmir.

In an interview to German magazine Der Spiegel, Musharraf said, "(Militant groups) were indeed formed. The government turned a blind eye because they wanted India to discuss Kashmir."

Official sources here said this admission was "no surprise". "We have known of the close links between Pakistan government and terror groups for a long time." But even though this is a known fact, this would be the first time such an admission has been made by a former head of state.

Questioned about Pakistan security forces training these terrorists, Musharraf said, "The west was ignoring resolution of the Kashmir issue, which is the core issue of Pakistan. We expected the west -- especially the United States and important countries like Germany -- to resolve the Kashmir issue."

Significantly, despite growing evidence that Pakistan's use of terrorism as an instrument of state policy has boomeranged, leading to mushrooming of terrorism within Pakistan, Musharraf did not regret starting the terror train against India. Asked whether the "neglect" of the Kashmir issue gave Pakistan the right to train underground fighters, he said, "Yes, it is the right of any country to promote its own interests when India is not prepared to discuss Kashmir at the United Nations and is not prepared to resolve the dispute in a peaceful manner."

Musharraf is planning a political comeback to Pakistan. So, the question analysts are asking is, why would he be making these admissions that is embarrassing to Pakistan now?

The defiant tone on using terror to force India to discuss J&K will obviously play well with the domestic audience.

But there could be other reasons as well for the candour. It's possible that Musharraf, who is known to be a strong "tactical" player, might be using this to embarrass his successor, General Pervez Kayani. While Kayani has laid bare his "India-centric" outlook, the automatic conclusion that Kayani in his previous job of DG-ISI would have overseen the training of terrorists against another country cannot but be embarrassing to him.

Particularly at a time when Wikileaks and a new book by Bob Woodward both clearly point to the Pakistan army-ISI duo in training and promoting international terrorism.

Second, Musharraf's admissions also reach an old political adversary of his -- Nawaz Sharif. After all, Sharif was PM during the worst of the Kashmir terrorism in the 1990s. Sharif and his PML(N) would be automatic adversaries for Musharraf. Sharif is also known to be very close to both the ISI and Pakistan's maverick chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhary. Neither of them would welcome Musharraf back to Pakistan.

Third, Musharraf could also be peddling his "acceptability" quotient to the west, whose support he will need to return to Pakistan. Just like Benazir Bhutto before him, Musharraf might be thinking that verbal acknowledgement of a dark past might show that he's willing to turn a new leaf. Bhutto played a similar game when she was plotting her return to Pakistan.

The Pakistan foreign office and Sharif have both denied Musharraf's confessions.

During the interview, on Afghanistan as well, Musharraf went against the established Pakistani line that the Haqqanis and Hekmatyars and Taliban could be reconciled and brought into the Kabul power structure. While Pakistan may have convinced some westerners of this, Musharraf openly scoffed at such a plan. "After 9/11, they (the US) fought the Taliban instead of strengthening the Pashtuns who could have taken on the radical Taliban.

Now, you try to negotiate with so-called `moderate Taliban', but there is no such thing as a moderate Taliban. There are Taliban and Pashtuns. But as I have always said: All Taliban are Pashtun, but not all Pashtun people are Taliban. Again, you should reinforce the ancient Pashtun clans who are not ideologically aligned with the Taliban to govern Afghanistan and to fight the Taliban. That's my strong advice."




A cat has come out of bag itself. What else world needs to know? The interview has said most about Kashmir. To address this issue, India need to manage people's psychology rather than people in Kashmir. Multicultural society has always proved to be more progressive and peaceful as compared to single community and no diversity. Why Indian philosophers are not aware of these facts and not working towards this? Is it, not wanting to contribute, lack of desire to do or simply ignorance for some reason? Kashmiri youth needs to be shown strengths and benefits of of being Indian and Kashmiri as opposed to being Just Kashmiri or like those in neighbouring country. Kashmiries need understand their family tree from pre Mougal period to understand their historic circumstances. This should help them dissociate from countries like Pakistan. They need to understand ulterior motive of hostile and incapable neighbour in using youth of Kashmir to unsuccessfully overcome Pakistan's own political shortcomings. Do Kashmiries want to be tool for selfish neighbour and ruin their present and future or they want to march ahead with their own country India to well-beings, prosperity and happiness? They need to be told simple stories like ''A Fox and Two Strong (friend) Bulls.'' Once Kashmiri youth realise ulterior motives, should divert their energy to protect themselves against divisive forces rather than their very own state police, CRPF and Army. Initiative must come now from you Kashmiri Indians.

Truth is out officially from Pakistan.Pakistan is blatantly supporting terror to annexe Kashmir.Partition of India is a blunder committed by Congress. Congress does not have guts and spine to strike Pakistan for fear of losing Muslim votes so important for them to loot the country.

Concerns no one else in the west, east, north and south. Kashmir was, is and will be part of India. The problem Pakistan has with Kashmir will solve itself when Pakistan destroys itself and they are on rapid pace to do so. Why do we talk to Pakistan any way? Bunch of puppets dancing in the shadow to the will of their puppet masters.

Hugh on Pakistan

Hugh on Pakistan

September 30, 2010
 

"We will have to see whether we are allies or enemies," Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik said of the border incident, without mentioning the blockade...."

It is the Americans who have over the past half-century deluded themselves into thinking that Pakistan, a Muslim country created of, by, and exclusively for, Muslims, and whose reason for being is the re-conquest of Kashmir and then of other parts of formerly Muslim-possessed India (its military has no other goal, no other mission, but to make war on Infidel India), could ever be an ally. The same mistake is made, in greater and lesser degrees, with other Muslim countries. Thus we routinely hear about "American allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan." This is nonsense. 

It is nonsense to those who bother to find out about the Islamic worldview, and who do not make the mistake, as a consequence, of confusing the occasional inveiglements and sweet-nothings of those who want our material aid (Jordan, Egypt) or who -- Saudi Arabia, and various Gulf statelets -- who want American military protection against certain Muslim enemies foreign (Iraq, Iran) and domestic (those who oppose the local kleptocratic rulers and necessarily frame their disgust with the corruption and theft in terms that require them to turn to local succursales of Al Qaeda).

Pakistan was not an "ally" during CENTO's brief existence. It was not an ally when it took American military aid and made war on India. It was not an ally when it used American aid to fund its nuclear project, based on Western secrets stolen by a metallugrist, A. Q. Khan. It was not an ally when it transferred, or sold, some of those nuclear secrets to North Korea, to Iran, possibly to Libya and others, too). It has not been an ally at all, as Senators Glenn and Pressler understood -- google "The Pressler Amendment." 

It was not an ally when Pakistan gave birth too, nurtured, and then helped establish as the rulers of Afghanistan, the Taliban. It has not been an ally during the last nine years of farcical efforts in "Af-Pak." It never will be, it cannot be, an ally of the Infidel Americans. This is very hard for the American government to allow itself to understand, just as it cannot as yet allow itself to understand that the presence, and growth, of the Muslim popoulation in the countries of Western Europe, of NATO, constitutes a permanent threat to the West, and to the United States, and that instead of supporting Turkish entry into the E.U., we should be firmly against it, and instead of discouraging those who, such as Geert Wilders, recognize the meaning, and thus the menace, of Islam for non-Muslims, we should do nothing to oppose, and a lot to encourage -- just as during the early years of the Cold War we encouraged those who in Europe recognized,against powerful local Communist parties the menace of Soviet Communism and its propaganda -- Wilders, Magdi Allam, and all others who in Western Europe are helping others to come to their collective senses.

Likes of Zaid Hamid had been advocating this(Cutting the NATO Supply Line) for a long time. Now, Pakistan has done it. It once again proves Mark Steyn's point that America is now perceived as a weak enemy, and can be easily arm-twisted into submission. There is hardly any evidence that the USA wishes to change this perception, and hence one can see the future quite clearly.

Obama or Clinton shall speak to Pakistan Army Chief, who runs the show in Pakistan, apologise for the NATO helicopters crossing the line, and killing the Pakistani soldiers, and promise to behave more responsibly in future. Pakistan will agree to re-open the supply line after USA promises to double its aid.


And the show will go on.